Very thought provoking:
The battles in Lebanon against the Hezbollah have been described as Israel’s first non-Arab war. Andrew Sullivan calls it a religious war, driven by ” the divine mandate that the Islamists believe they are following … where the Jews must be destroyed as a people and as
a sovereign state in order for the Apocalypse to occur.” But for Sullivan, it’s not just Nasrallah’s particular brand of religious motivation that is suspect, but religion in general. On the subject of the Apocalypse Sullivan writes ” Pat Robertson and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are in complete agreement”, the sole difference being that Robertson is merely ” a corrupt kook” while ” Ahmadinejad has some serious weaponry and a state under his control.” Thus Sullivan sees only a difference in degree and not of essence.
Perhaps, but with the Jihad advancing under a religious banner and all religions doubtful, under what banner should those who oppose it fight? Read More.